Saturday, April 28, 2012

That which is most precious


Hello Friends;
  Below is an article I found interesting on numerous levels.  Mostly, I find myself with the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Zimmerman should be punished by any and all means available, including the forfeiture of any funds raised for his legal defense.  But, then I come to the brick wall of justice.
  Did Trayvon receive his share of justice?  Well, then why should Zimmerman?  And yet, if we as a people are no more than thieves, what are we to become?
   In criminal law, there is a saying I've heard goes something like "all the justice he could buy".  Is it right that we need to have a considerable amount of money in order to pay for a quality defense?  I don't know... you literally get what you pay for when it comes to attorneys far too often.  What would be ideal is for some sort of fact finding process done by the state that comes to a fair and equitable result.  But, administered and populated by man, there is no way it would ever work.
  The simple fact of the matter is that we in this country, and perhaps we as a species, have far too small a value on life, on quality life.  Somehow we have found that the taking of life is far too acceptable - be that from a permanent perspective, like what happened to Trayvon, or a slow lingering death like Mr. Zimmerman is now facing. 
  I have no soundbites, no snap judgements.  I only have sadness that two lives, at the bare minimum, are forever changed by one man's willingness to place into his hand that which can only take that which is most precious.

                                 ~

(CNN) -- George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer accused of wrongly killing Trayvon Martin, will not immediately have to turn over donations made to his website, a Florida judge said Friday.

Zimmerman collected about $204,000 in donations through the website, but did not disclose the contributions during his bond hearing last week, according to his attorney, Mark O'Mara. Prosecutors had asked for a bond of $1 million, but Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. made it $150,000 after Zimmerman's family testified they did not have the resources necessary to meet the higher level.
Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda on Friday asked Lester to increase the bond in light of the donations. But the judge said he would delay ruling on the request, in part because he does not know if he has authority to say how the money can be used.
Lester and O'Mara both said they are concerned about releasing the names of donors to Zimmerman, who has faced threats since the case began making national headlines in March.
Zimmerman, 28, was released Monday on $150,000 bail, 10% of which was put up to secure his release while he awaits trial on a second-degree murder charge in Martin's February 26 death.
About $5,000 from the website contribution was used in making bond, O'Mara said. The rest came from a loan secured by a family home.
Although Zimmerman spent some of the contributions on living expenses, about $150,000 remains, O'Mara said Friday. O'Mara said he has put the money into a trust he controls until a final decision is made about its use.
Lester asked for additional information about the accounts but did not indicate when he would rule.
"I'm not going to make a snap decision," the judge said.
Also during Friday's hearing, Lester declined to consider a gag order requested by prosecutors, saying it was premature and that none of the attorneys in the case had said anything to concern him so far. CNN was among the media organizations opposing the motion.
O'Mara said he learned about the money this week as he and Zimmerman were trying to shut down Zimmerman's website, Facebook page and Twitter account to avoid concerns about possible impersonators and other problems.
"He asked me what to do with his PayPal accounts, and I asked him what he was talking about," O'Mara told CNN's Anderson Cooper on Thursday. "He said those were the accounts that had the money from the website he had. And there was about ... $204,000 that had come in to date."
O'Mara had said earlier this month that he believed Zimmerman had no money.
Asked whether knowledge of the money might have made a difference to Lester, who presided at Zimmerman's bond hearing, O'Mara said, "It might have."
O'Mara could not explain why Zimmerman didn't disclose the funds, but said he didn't think his client had meant to deceive anyone.
"I consider it an oversight because I don't see anything else that suggests that Mr. Zimmerman has been insincere or dishonest," he told CNN's Erin Burnett on Friday. "The moment I asked him about it, he acknowledged it and forwarded the money."
Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump said Zimmerman's failure to reveal that he had the money shows that he is being dishonest.
"If his testimony at the bond hearing is any indication of what is to come, then the lying has already begun," Crump said.
"This is going to say a lot about whether Trayvon Martin can get a fair trial," he told Burnett. "If he (Lester) doesn't revoke his bond, the court should severely sanction him so George Zimmerman understands you cannot lie to the court."
Separately, the attorney said the Martin family has raised less than $100,000 in fund-raising efforts to date, and that the money collected will go toward the Trayvon Martin Foundation.
Crump said his firm will not collect a fee in any of the criminal proceedings.
"If we collect any money, it will be from a civil lawsuit and not from any donor money," he said.
Zimmerman was arrested April 11 after a lengthy delay punctuated by protests and rallies nationwide calling for charges against him.
Critics accuse Zimmerman of racially profiling and unjustly killing Martin, a 17-year-old African-American. Zimmerman told police he shot Martin in self-defense, according to police reports.
Although details of the shooting remain murky, it is known that Martin ventured out from the Sanford, Florida, home of his father's fiancee and went to a nearby convenience store, where he bought a bag of candy and an iced tea. On his way back, he had a confrontation with Zimmerman, who shot him.
Zimmerman had called 911 to complain about a suspicious person in the neighborhood, according to authorities.
In the call, Zimmerman said he was following Martin after the teen started to run, prompting the dispatcher to tell him, "We don't need you to do that." Zimmerman pursued Martin anyway but then said he lost sight of him.
According to an Orlando Sentinel story later confirmed by Sanford police, Zimmerman told authorities that after he briefly lost track of Martin, the teen approached him. After the two exchanged words, Zimmerman said, he reached for his cell phone, and then Martin punched him in the nose. Zimmerman said Martin pinned him to the ground and began slamming his head onto the sidewalk, leading to the shooting.
Police have said Zimmerman was not immediately charged because there was no evidence to disprove his account that he'd acted in self-defense. A police report indicated he was bleeding from the nose and the back of his head.
O'Mara on Friday revealed a new website, www.gzlegalcase.com, and another site, not yet live, that will host a defense fund. The only thing on the site Friday afternoon was a statement about the donations.

Regardless of what happens to the contributions, O'Mara intends to open a legal defense fund for his client, he said.

"I've had dozens, hundreds actually, of people wanting to donate," he said Thursday.
O'Mara, who said he charges $400 per hour for family law cases, estimated Zimmerman's defense costs could reach $1 million.

"You can really go through a lot of money on a case like this, with the intensity of it," he said.

Friday, April 27, 2012

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

anonymity

Hello Friends;

  I was off following one link after another today, just sort of whiling away the rainy day, if you will, and came upon this pic.  I passed it on without much thought, but realized it stayed in my thoughts and I couldn't quite understand why.

  Maybe you are having the same problem?

It occurred to me that we often make sweeping statements about the laws, the ways things should be, even what would seem acceptable in some ways and not others - and do it all without really caring about the individuals impacted. 

  I recall a very intense discussion I had with my father when President Obama spoke on Trevor Martin's death and said something towards the order that 'if I had a son, he would look just like Trevor'.  Now, some would say that is inappropriate, and yet I wonder if that is the only appropriate response?

  I also thought about all the people that are struggling in this world in anonymity.  Be they sons of tycoons or of welfare mothers, living life forgotten or ignored.  Living life without anyone who cares.

  We throw symbols, make declarations, even march.... do we really care for the individual?

I don't know what to make of this picture, and I think that's what bothers me the most.  Tell me what you think. 

hugs;
randy

Friday, April 20, 2012

Monday, April 16, 2012

Control


Hello Friends;

  I have been thinking again.  Sorry.  I try not to let it happen too often since the results are usually comic or tragic, but every now and again, like an old Ford diesel left too long in the weeds, the machinations of my mind are prompted to move again, rust and weeds grinding into the dirt below.  What comes from the screeching and noise is rarely impressive, often only half developed - I guess the glow plugs aren't all working.  But, up from the sludge and grime of my clogged mind floats another's words, I forget who, who lamented the continuing plight of the efforts to control the basic and relatively uncontrollable.
  Man is who he is, and as I think back on history it seems we have this constant struggle, at least as records show it, to seek to take what is alive and free and somehow shape it into images and actions of our own design.  I think of it as controlling what should be uncontrolled.
  Some have said that religion is the practice of a select few dictating to the masses that which they may and may not do yet hypocritically living by other rules.   I guess I have a hope that what is done at face value is, well, basically genuine.  But, they say that the priesthood is of the oldest of professions, matched only by the prostitute and the politician.  Seems somehow appropriate, and yet is there nothing more to our existence than what we see here and now?
But what we see in the here and now is an ever developing and ever more defining delineation of who are to be the free and who are to be the controlled.  We see more and more of the basic things tied into laws and criminalized, and in an effort to project morality and define acceptability we degrade and destroy entire families.  Think on these things as you see the evening news:  Were those laws that balloon our prison population even in effect 25 years ago?  50?  Why after so many years on earth are we in need of such big changes?
  I think of the article I read on Scottie's blog about the so-called Romeo laws and relate them to a book I was just reading about the Feudal ages - you know, castles and King Arther and stuff.  Most specifically:  is it all that unreasonable to think that kids in their teens are going to want to have sex?  In fact, can we not almost presume it?  They say that from historical norms, Mary, mother of Jesus, was likely about 14, maybe less, when she was gifted of child.  Good thing we didn't have today's laws back then, God would have been in jail!  And yet, what was acceptable in that time, what was even acceptable to God if the story be believed, is now a horrible thing?  Immoral?  Destructive?
  Look at the way our "war on drugs" has destroyed our economy, the lives of numerous families, and even the way that the underworld black-market style of sales have created a whole new way of life in cities and even rural areas. 
  I recall when my grandmother was failing in her health.  She had come to a point where she wasn't wanting to eat anymore and in pain.  She went from the typical American overweight to someone gaunt and looking starved.  My thoughts at the time were to give her a joint.  How simple?  It would help with the pain, give her the munchies!  Only downside is the new need to buy Dorritos in a flavor grandmothers would like.  But, alas, no.  The doctors were free to give her morphine derivatives, put her in a bed and ignore her, but to put a bit of weed in her toast and butter would have drawn the feds down upon everyone's head.
  I guess I don't have such a great idea on how to fix any of this, except to say that we have lost something wonderful and majestic in life:  freedom.  Like that movie with Mel Gibson, where the State had taken his family, his land, his wife and finally locked him up, put him on a table, and taken the very skin and manhood, his dying words, perhaps a bit dramatic, were "Freedom".  
  Why must we be so tightly controlled?  Why must those in power be so fearful of everyone else?  Why must we say things like "Gay Rights", or "Women's Rights".   Where would anyone declare that a "War on Family Values" must be answered with criminalization and prisons?  How is it that we can live in the land of the free and have no wings?